Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

8257722: Improve "keytool -printcert -jarfile" output #6126

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

haimaychao
Copy link
Contributor

@haimaychao haimaychao commented Oct 26, 2021

This change does a few improvements to the output of keytool -printcert -jarfile command to help readability and diagnosis.


Progress

  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue
  • Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

  • JDK-8257722: Improve "keytool -printcert -jarfile" output

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/6126/head:pull/6126
$ git checkout pull/6126

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/6126
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/6126/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 6126

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 6126

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6126.diff

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 26, 2021

👋 Welcome back hchao! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Oct 26, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Oct 26, 2021

@haimaychao The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • security

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the security security-dev@openjdk.org label Oct 26, 2021
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Oct 26, 2021

Webrevs

@@ -2875,13 +2884,14 @@ private void doPrintCert(final PrintStream out) throws Exception {
out.printf(rb.getString("Signer.d."), ++pos);
out.println();
out.println();
out.println(rb.getString("Signature."));
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please remove a newline as well. There needn't be 3 println() calls.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done.

@@ -465,6 +465,8 @@
{"the.input", "The input"},
{"reply", "Reply"},
{"one.in.many", "%1$s #%2$d of %3$d"},
{"one.in.many1", "%1$s of signer #%2$d"},
{"one.in.many2", "%1$s #%2$d of %3$d of signer #%4$d"},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

certificate #1 of 2 of signer #1 is a little too complicated. The second number is not really necessary. I think certificate #1 of signer #1 is enough.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done. Changed the warning message.

@wangweij
Copy link
Contributor

wangweij commented Oct 27, 2021

One new comment: Now that if there is only one cert, there is no need to write Certificate #n of m. If there's only one signer, we also don't need to write of signer #n.

ss.add(signer);
out.printf(rb.getString("Signer.d."), ++pos);
}
}
Copy link
Contributor

@wangweij wangweij Oct 28, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the while (entries.hasMoreElements()) block should end here, so that you collect all signers of all entries before printing them out. Also, there is no need to count CodeSigner, you can simply get it from ss.size().

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed.

Copy link
Contributor

@wangweij wangweij left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks fine now.

I wonder if the order of signers in the set matters. It's possible that one signer appears first in the result of getCodeSigners() but because HashSet maintains no order it becomes the second. If you are also worried about this, you can make ss a LinkedHashSet.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Oct 28, 2021

@haimaychao This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8257722: Improve "keytool -printcert -jarfile" output

Reviewed-by: weijun

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 50 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 21da218: 8274848: LambdaMetaFactory::metafactory on REF_invokeSpecial impl method has incorrect behavior
  • 48f3fca: 8275308: Add valueOf(Runtime.Version) factory to SourceVersion
  • c6339cb: 8271820: Implementation of JEP 416: Reimplement Core Reflection with Method Handle
  • 5a768f7: 8276054: JMH benchmarks for Fences
  • 6d8fa8f: 8255286: Implement ParametersTypeData::print_data_on fully
  • 63b9f8c: 8153490: Cannot setBytes() if incoming buffer's length is bigger than number of elements we want to insert.
  • cb989cf: 8275052: AArch64: Severe AES/GCM slowdown on MacOS for short blocks
  • c92f230: 8276110: Problemlist javax/swing/JMenu/4515762/bug4515762.java for macos12
  • 309acbf: 8275703: System.loadLibrary fails on Big Sur for libraries hidden from filesystem
  • abe52ae: 8275518: accessibility issue in Inet6Address docs
  • ... and 40 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/3ff085e2967508ad312c9d32fa908807aefe69ee...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Oct 28, 2021
@haimaychao
Copy link
Contributor Author

It'd be worry-free by keeping the same ordering. Changed as suggested. Thanks for the review!

@haimaychao
Copy link
Contributor Author

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Oct 28, 2021

Going to push as commit de93b1d.
Since your change was applied there have been 50 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 21da218: 8274848: LambdaMetaFactory::metafactory on REF_invokeSpecial impl method has incorrect behavior
  • 48f3fca: 8275308: Add valueOf(Runtime.Version) factory to SourceVersion
  • c6339cb: 8271820: Implementation of JEP 416: Reimplement Core Reflection with Method Handle
  • 5a768f7: 8276054: JMH benchmarks for Fences
  • 6d8fa8f: 8255286: Implement ParametersTypeData::print_data_on fully
  • 63b9f8c: 8153490: Cannot setBytes() if incoming buffer's length is bigger than number of elements we want to insert.
  • cb989cf: 8275052: AArch64: Severe AES/GCM slowdown on MacOS for short blocks
  • c92f230: 8276110: Problemlist javax/swing/JMenu/4515762/bug4515762.java for macos12
  • 309acbf: 8275703: System.loadLibrary fails on Big Sur for libraries hidden from filesystem
  • abe52ae: 8275518: accessibility issue in Inet6Address docs
  • ... and 40 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/3ff085e2967508ad312c9d32fa908807aefe69ee...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Oct 28, 2021
@openjdk openjdk bot added integrated Pull request has been integrated and removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Oct 28, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Oct 28, 2021

@haimaychao Pushed as commit de93b1d.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
integrated Pull request has been integrated security security-dev@openjdk.org
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants